Why the Range Rover line-up needs the Velar

To understand why the Range Rover model line-up needs the upcoming Velar, you need only consider the size of the price gap that exists between the Evoque (typical price £40,000) and Range Rover Sport (typical price £80,000).

In marketing terms, you’re looking at a gap large enough to drive a truck through — but instead, it's JLR’s opposition that has been doing the driving.

Models such as the BMW X6 and Mercedes-Benz GLE are doing great business in a reasonably high-numbers market where people also spend a lot of money on extras.

If Land Rover is to fulfil its mission to be the world’s top luxury SUV specialist, it must surely plug the gaps more generalist rivals have identified — and do it with designs that save it from accusations of a ‘Russian doll’ styling approach.

Besides that, the Velar provides a much-needed opportunity for Land Rover to take a new design direction. The models we’ve seen in recent years have all been beautifully executed but feed off a wedge-roofed, square-backed design style established with the seminal 2008 concept called the LRX.

That model, speculatively penned by Julian Thomson - who is now Jaguar’s head of advanced design - generated such an enormous surge of approval that the company was almost duty-bound to put it into production. It became the Range Rover Evoque in 2011, by which time Land Rover design was headed by its present boss, Gerry McGovern. The Velar is the first chance for McGovern’s team to move away from the norm, which adds fascination.

All in your head A34. The Q7 is not built for what the RRS does, and the Sport is not big enough to be a Q7 competitor. You are not comparing like with like and therefore price comparisons are not valid.

The Jaguar F-Pace is a big success. So a rebodied, more upmarket version makes sense. JLR are giving people what they want - and whilst I don't like SUVs, the management of the Range Rover brand has been exemplary, even if the product sometimes falls short.

Gerry M may appear a little too dapper 'in the flesh' compared to the more avuncular Ian Callum but on this evidence his management of LR's design is masterful. Can you name a better design director that's been in charge of a historical (or otherwise) brand over the last 10 years ? Exactly.

A more "driver" orientated concept, more "sporting" & in the 60K price range...................
Isn't that the same segment as the Jaguar F-Pace???
The Velar looks about the same site too, so is it on the same platform??

No doubt the Velar will fill a gap in the JLR range but surely it could have been a more clearly defined model. The marketing hype of a bold new model isn't reflected in what is simply a derivative design. I really want to like this car, if it has the right balance of on-road dynamics and off-road capability then it could tick a lot of boxes for me and it's built in Britain and supports British suppliers but why oh why does every Range Rover model just look like a scaled down version of the real thing? I understand the need for a recognisable design language but not simply creating clones and personally I'm not fussed wjether it says Range Rover or not - I know it's not a FFRR. Back in the 70/80/90's I don't remember ever struggling to identify a Land Rover/Austin Rover/Ford/Merc or BMW model as anything other than what it was, so why do todays designers (not just JLR) feel so inhibited in creating individually styled models. Also (specific to RR), why are they all (even the otherwise diminutive Evoque) so damn wide? At over 2m they're too wide to fit comfortably in a standard parking bay, however well you park - it just causes annoyance to other drivers and anxiety to the owner...